bigcatdiary

Info on the Poole thread suggests it's just Huckenbeck and Busch that's been banned.

No thanks, well past his sell by

If they steer clear on injuries I cannot see anyone getting near Somerset, head and shoulders above everyone else with Glasgow second.

HOLUB rides mid track first and second bend and has been doing it for weeks, just never learns, BEWLEY summed it up after two laps and rode well, not for the first time this season a visiting reserve showing the home riders the best lines.

Many a true word spoken in jest

I don't doubt that for a minute, so why wasn't either of the websites explaining his absence, it's just not fair on the paying public.

BSPA round up states it is, very strange signing that raises more questions than answers. PLYMOUTH have signed Steve Boxall to replace Brady Kurtz who has quit the club to allow him to focus on other commitments. Boxall will make his debut this Friday, subject to BSPA approval, against Berwick, a side Devils team manager Lee Trigger believes could push Plymouth all the way.

Well with promises made by Buster Chapman and a new SCB manager shortly to be installed I sincerely hope the rulebook is sorted out and administered properly and fairly. We will see.

Unbeaten home record gets you jack Shyte if your away record is crap. Looks like you haven't learned that one from last year.

Peterborough told that Perry rides in the 1-5 when his average went to 5.58. As others have said they just make it up as they go along, I don't think anyone at the BSPA anticipated any if the PL draft riders would ever get out if the reserve berths so it wasn't considered.

It will of course be interesting if all assessed riders start at the same 7.00 average that the Scandinavians are saddled with. Then perhaps some of the teams will start developing British talent rather than taking the easier option and always looking abroad.

As has been explained before it wasn't so much a gamble but a decision made after May did his homework.

And isn't hindsight a wonderful thing, as it stands it wouldn't have made any difference, 3 extra points by virtue of the TR would have still resulted in us losing by one.

I thought it was interesting that of the two SCB statements issued at the same time only One had the SCB panel listed which included one Edinburgh promoter. The rulebook contradicts itself which is evident by the SCB statement, it basically comes down to how the powers at be want to interpret the rules, a good example is Matt Ford in the star this week with Ford quoting the meeting referee and Graham Reeve as completely unable to say why he couldn't use Jake Allen or Charles Wright as a guest in the Poole match v Lakeside. Perhaps a new SCB manager and a new rulebook will help, we will see, I am not holding my breath.

I doubt Perry will be in the fours team

It's not hard to see how you got your user name.

looks like your Peterborough is wrong

Of course that's assuming all of the above were available (which is doubtful) and would ride for reasonable money. Not so much total lack of imagination but won't be held to ransom.

Yet another classic example of how good our rule book is, with one club saying they are right and another saying they are. Quite why the BSPA cannot issue a set of averages monthly that shows EVERY riders GSA and a converted GSA for EL/PL and even NL where applicable is beyond me. Everyone could then work to one set of averages and applicable guests could be sorted without any of this aggravation.

Been fairly warm and bright all day

It as clearly a late challenge as I have previously said the teams were known on Sunday, but nothing was decided until the day of the meeting. It wasn't a difficult decision, question why is Ellis missing, answer he is riding in a Grasstrack meeting in France. The principle behind the team declarations is deliberately done so the office, referee and the respective teams can check the validity of the teams and any changes required can be made to AVOID instances of teams riding short and thereby not short changing the paying public who of course expect both teams to be at full strength. It is the responsibility of the meeting referee to ensure the teams are correctly listed and any facilities used are correct.

To be fair Poole never explained initially why Ellis was missing so I have completely no sympathy with them either. As I mentioned previously no one comes out of this with any credit, Poole, Lakeside or the Referee because all three would have known well in advance if they had done their job properly. It's noteworthy that you and EI Addio never cease to raise the above point when ever I put Lakeside at fault. So who complained about Poole using Wright on the day of the match?

What I don't understand (other than obvious gamesmanship) is why Lakeside waited until the last minute to object to Wright bearing in mind he was named on Sunday to be in the team. The whole point of the declaration of team line ups ahead of the match was to avoid instances exactly like this. Clearly the referee didn't check either. I don't think anyone comes out with any credit for this fiasco least of all Lakeside.

One wonders why this was only picked up tonight.